On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:56:11 -0800, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
> wrote:

>How many judges are going to put up with constant and unending
>requests from a cop for search warrants which end up never panning
>out?

Based on experience, quite a few. In your own back yard, look at the
Molalla cop who just now got recognized by the Clackamas DA as a bad actor;
how long did that take?

When a rogue or lazy cop plus a compliant judge end up knocking your door
down at oh-dark-thirty, who pays to fix the damage from the 'search'?

Who replaces the time lost? Who removes your frustration, makes it all
better?

Better it is that this malfeasance doesn't occur in the first place. But,
it does.

>The current court system, which is really overloaded as it is,
>does not have time for this.

Nor does it often have time to police the police.

>Not to mention that you have to have
>suspicion/evidence of criminal activity to get a warrant in the first
>place, and speeding isn't a crime, it's an infraction. I don't think there
>are going to be many judges out there who are going to be issuing
>warrants to cops that want a warrant just so they can check the
>black box to see if someone's been speeding, when there are no
>injuries or fatalities in the accident. And if they do, then vote them
>out of office, these judges are elected, after all.
<snip>

Isn't it incredibly difficult and expensive to mount a campaign to unseat
an incumbent judge?